"Answer a set of Yes questions? I am amazed you think this is an effective measure to prevent sale of a gun to the wrong kind of people. I am done taking your post seriously."

At no point did I state it was effective, I merely pointed out they are there and your answers to them are REQUIRED before you will be allowed to purchase a firearm. You can choose to lie on the form all you wish, but that is, in itself, a crime. Recall my thoughts on what criminals think of rules and laws . . . .

"Alcohol and tobacco already have sin tax (they are consumable) applied to sales"

And has that tax been effective at deterring people from smoking or drinking at all ? Considering about 10k deaths from alcohol related crashes in 2010 ( latest statistics ) I would say probably not. Especially sobering ( no pun intended ) to compare it to 11k deaths via homicide with firearms the same year.

Yet, I see nothing about folks discussing banning certain types of alcohol based on silly criteria . . . .

To top it off, tobacco DWARFS alcohol and firearms deaths COMBINED. According to the CDC, it estimates the number of tobacco related deaths to be in the 440,000 range per year. Secondhand smoke accounting for roughly 50k of that number.

Yet, we're not limiting sales of cigarettes to specific types or amounts are we . . . . :|

Why ?

Because it's death over time. ( DOTS DOTS more DOTS ! ) We're cool with it as long as it isn't a dozen kiddos all at once that invades the news for weeks at a time.

It's also because any attempt to ban cigarettes and alcohol outright would result in the majority of America going into ape-shit poo-flinging mode since those two " sins " as you put it are enjoyed by a much larger audience than firearms are.

Seriously though, if this was about " Protecting America ", guns would be down the list a bit from the other major killers. Since this is not the case, we know it's not about protecting the children from evil shooters. Rather it's about pushing a political agenda some have been trying to get away with for years. They simply waited for the latest tragedy to emerge before trying it again.

If you disagree with this, can you give me any reasonable explanation as to why alcohol and tobacco are still very much legal to use considering how much they contribute to the overall death toll in this country on a yearly basis ?



"A RFID chip in the gun that would take hard drilling to get out?"

Won't work either, I would just hit it with a high voltage pulse to destroy the RFID circuitry.


From what I can tell, you're trying to track the tool used in the commission of the crime instead of focusing on the reason behind the crime itself. I know why, because it's a potentially easier fix than trying to identify and / or fix the mentally unstable committing the crimes to begin with.

Somehow you believe that folks with traceable firearms would refrain from criminal behavior. Which is about as far from the truth as you can possibly get. In each of the massacre scenarios that has brought the whole "omgevilblackassaultguns" into the spotlight, the shooters have died. Either by their own hand or by the police. I assure you they don't CARE that you know it was their gun ( or not ) that was used in the crime. There is no one left to charge with a crime because the criminal(s) is(are) dead. Thus the frustration and the silliness that comes about every time something like this happens.

OMG-DO-SOMETHING !!!!! :D

So it boggles my mind how anyone could possibly think that implementing more tracking rules could do anything to prevent or deter future crimes of a similar nature from happening.